Leadership

woman holding coffee mug that says like a boss

What to Do When Your Boss is Wrong?

I recently was reading a Harvard Business Review article about “supporting a decision you don’t agree with.” The article was helpful, and offered the reader wise counsel in advocating that workers should not undermine their boss’ decision. They’re both on the same team after all!

But, this got me wondering: What about when the boss is wrong? Bosses are human after all, and all humans are prone to making mistakes. So what happens when the boss is entirely wrong, and you the worker can see it, yet the boss wants to move forward anyway? To be sure, this goes beyond “supporting a decision you don’t agree with.” I am referring to big initiatives, where the very survival of the organization may hang in the balance. What do you do then?

For starters, respectfully challenge the decision. If anyone I lead is reading this, I want noise, albeit in a respectful tone! “Your idea sucks,” is harsh, but it may be necessary. It would be better to say something like “here is where your idea may run into trouble” —and then name the potential obstacles. The point is that you need to speak up! And not just once. The leader had better fully understand your point of view, its merits, and your concerns around the direction they—the leader— intend to go. The most unhelpful thing you can do for your organization is be quiet in the moment, and play “armchair quarterback” later. Know-it-alls in hindsight are not helpful whatsoever.

Speak up in the moment!

But what if the boss still does not listen? Dan Coyle shares an example of this in The Culture Code (yes, this book again!). The story is of Dave Cooper, and his now famous “Seal Team 6’s” capture of Osama Bin Laden. You’ll have to read the story yourself in the book. The short version, goes like this: The higher ups ordered Cooper to use a new kind of stealth helicopter for the mission to capture Bin Laden. The problem? The chopper had never been used in combat! Cooper challenged authority, but command was insistent. Instead of blindly obeying the order, or denying the order, Cooper did something altogether different by preparing his men for every conceivable thing that could go wrong with the helicopter. In fact, as Coyle shares, they practiced “downed helicopter drills” so many times that his men started sarcastically joking about running even more drills. The result is amazing. (Go buy the book!)

What do you do the next time something similar happens in your organization? For example, the boss is insistent on using a certain supplier that you suspect will fail. You respectfully voice your concern to no avail. Do you sit back and watch, or like Cooper, or do you help the team do “drills” in anticipation of the challenge to come?

Leaders always take ownership of the problem!

Leaders are always out to help others succeed, no matter the cost to their own ego!

This leads us to one final reminder before closing: Respectfully voicing your opinion and planning for contingencies are positive behaviors of any culture. Sitting around and gossiping about how stupid management is —regardless of how true that sentiment may be —is not. As Dr. Henry Cloud has said before, “I do not understand people who pee in their cereal and gripe because it tastes bad!”

Bosses are often wrong. Challenge them respectfully. Create contingency plans that will serve the organization.

Just don’t pee in everyone’s cereal.

What to Do When Your Boss is Wrong? Read More »

businessmen shaking hands

The Simplicity of Connecting

I have been devouring Daniel Coyle’s The Culture Code lately.  Providing simple actionable advice on creating a positive and effective culture, it is quickly becoming one of the best books I have read so far this year.

A chapter that grabbed my attention early in the book is entitled “How to Build Belonging.” In it, Coyle examines long-time San Antonio Spurs’ Head basketball coach, Gregg Popovich. “Pop,” as he is known by NBA fans, has had one of the most successful tenures as a head coach in NBA history. His teams have always stood out to the common observer because they have exhibited unselfishness not common in the modern NBA. Their winning record and 5 NBA titles placed them consistently in the “who is the best team in the NBA” conversation.

Success on the court is one thing, but what has always stood out about Pop to me is how much his players, and even players on other teams, adore him. How does he connect with so many people? Coyle points to three intentional practices Coach Popovich practices (this chapter alone is worth the price of the book, and by no means am I doing it justice below):

Pop practices connectivity. Coyle details how Pop invades personal space, touches players’ elbows or gives them a pat on the back, and specifically attends to players who might have struggled in the previous game. This is all intentional. What challenged me was how simple this is. It is something any leader can do.Pop then critiques. Pop is known for not sugar coating any message to his players or other coaches. We have all read countless biographies of leaders willing to “tell it like it is,” but what makes Pop different is when and how the criticism is delivered. It always comes after a connection has been formed—as in step 1 above. This is more effective than the “feedback sandwich” approach where managers handout criticism “sandwiched” between two positive attributes. This tends to make the positives feel less authentic. Compare this to Pop” who has been known to absolutely berate his players, including the superstars like Tim Duncan and Tony Parker, during practices. The players’ openness to such criticism seems to indicate a unique connection to Pop. For if they were not connected, would they be open to such criticism? One probably suspects not. Moreover, “Pop” seems to understand the need for the players to accept coaching, because as Coyle writes in the chapter, he thanks “each player for allowing him to coach them” at every season’s end. Talk about an example to follow in our own leadership!Pop teaches perspective to the team. I have heard stories, and Coyle details a few in the chapter, about how Pop uses game-film study sessions to show his team documentaries about history, politics, and other topics of importance. In fact, Pop encourages discussion about these matters within the team. This perspective not only reminds players that there are bigger issues in the world than the game of basketball, but it also reinforces how connected they are as a team (we can talk about anything and everything here). So when the Spurs lose a big game, and they have had some gut-wrenching defeats during Pop’s tenure, they’re able to maintain perspective and process the loss, and emotions that come with the loss, together.

What does all this mean for us? For starters, it reminds us that connecting with those we lead is not only vital, but often simpler than we assume. It just takes intentionality and focus. As Coyle reminds the reader, Pop does not engage much with technology, and did not carry an iPhone until 2018 (he has yet to send a single text message per Coyle).

No wonder he has the time for this kind of intentionality.

Here are some ideas to increase connectivity with your team this summer:

—Schedule a team dinner this summer.

—Tell your team “thank you” today (be specific for why you are thanking them however).

—Read and discuss a history book with your team.

—Consider ways of connecting physically with your team (Know your audience here, and obviously avoid anything that could be creepy or misinterpreted. A hand shake, fist bump, or a pat on the back when appropriate are proven to be extremely powerful!).

The list could go on and on. The point is this: To build a great culture, you have to be intentional about connecting with, and valuing, others.

The Simplicity of Connecting Read More »

factory worker with face shield

Some Thoughts on Traditional Job Roles & Expectations

I was recently reminded reading the Harvard Business Review that most organizations rely on workers to fulfill the specific job description associated with the title of the position they are being hired for, rather than allowing them, the worker, to create a role more suited to their skills set. Given the challenges all manufactures —us included —face to cut costs, optimize processes, and become more efficient, this got me thinking: should workers be tied to a job description? Should we persist in the standard model, largely based on hierarchy, that can restrict workers from engaging in activities outside their standard job role/title?

I pose this question because it is an aspect of organizational life that I have been thinking about since my role morphed to include operations, in addition to both sales and engineering. Frankly, I have found it easy to give our sales and engineering teams complete autonomy. That said, they all have “traditional titles” on their business cards, and while their deliverables are mutually-constructed, it is safe to say that they’re pretty standard in the industry. Most do, however, play hybrid roles, meaning they contribute more than their traditional title would suggest. Some have customer service backgrounds, and provide value that is addition of our standard customer service team (one recently drove parts to a customer on a Saturday morning, for instance).  A few others are more technical, and can provide tooling knowledge that goes beyond the scope of their “Business Development” title. And perhaps the most impressive example is our proprietary product team, which can offer unique knowledge on filling technology in the flexible packaging market, and is supported by our automation team that can completely change over an existing horizontal, form, fill, and seal, and pre-spouted pouch machines to accommodate our parts.

I fear the above sounds like a brag, so here is where we are not as “advanced”: the manufacturing floor. While certain groups in our company are empowered to use their gifts, especially when those gifts are outside the scope of their job title, our manufacturing floor still feels very “traditional” as I suspect it did two decades ago. Hourly workers, in particular, have a lot more structure around the tasks they are supposed to perform on a daily basis. And like all of us, they have challenges they have to deal with on a daily and weekly basis. For example, I have been told frequently that given our current environment at Hoffer Plastics, they feel continually challenged around the level of business (i.e. busyness on the floor): Foremen struggle to find weekend coverage in all our plants, and I sense burnout on the rise as weekend work has not slowed down so far in 2018 (of course I fear it will). Therefore, engagement is a big deal to leaders like me. I value our hourly workers because the work they do is, in a lot of ways, what we all get paid for by our customers. So as a leader, it is my job to uncover ways to increase their engagement, and frankly, happiness.

So this brings me full circle to the question at hand: would more autonomy increase worker engagement? How would it work, given the non-negotiable aspects of manufacturing (like quality standards, production demands, etc.)? How can I train our plant managers to embrace this kind of thinking?

These are thoughts on my mind at the gym right now (where I do my best thinking!).

I don’t have the answer to these questions today, which is one of the reasons I am writing this post. I hope to start a conversation with you, the reader. What ideas do you have for improving employee morale and engagement? What ideas do you have for shaking up traditional hierarchies on manufacturing floors?

To be clear, we do uncover hidden talents on the floor, and we do promote from within. For example, our plant managers have all come from within over the decade I have been here, and that has had ripple effects in terms of internal promotions. I have been pleasantly surprised when hidden gems have stepped up in their new roles. But it still bothers me that we are most likely still missing hidden potential. (I’m sure I will hear about “hidden talents” from people on our floor after posting this, which is one of the reasons I am writing it in the first place!).

I’ll close by repeating some of my core beliefs: Every job matters, and every human being here matters. As leaders, we have to use our leadership gifts (whatever they are) to help marry people’s skills, passions, and unique abilities to meeting our customers’ needs. After all, the mission remains to manufacture plastic parts that increase our customers’ productivity and profitability. They remain the hero!

I could not finish without reminding the reader of that.

Some Thoughts on Traditional Job Roles & Expectations Read More »

mount rushmore

Why Read History?

A recent study conducted by the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany found that 41% of all respondents (and two-thirds of millennial respondents) could not correctly identify what happened at Auschwitz. Making matters worse, 22% of the Millennial respondents told the same survey that they have NEVER even heard of the Holocaust.

This is horrifying. And as George Santayana famously said, “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

While I passionately urge all people, especially Americans, to read and understand history, the readers of this blog are generally business people looking for leadership insights. So why should you read history? Here are three reasons:

Reading history gives one perspective.

I often hear people say that the world is worse today than it has ever been. While this sounds true, and admittedly sometimes feels true when I watch the news, a quick historical glance makes one doubt the statement’s accuracy. Are things worse today than they were for the African Americans in the nineteenth century, or Eastern Europeans in the mid-twentieth century? Of course not. But it is also trite to then automatically assume things for both groups are “better” today because in comparison they are much better off than in those periods. This is my point about perspective.

History forces one to examine reality, think critically about differing versions of that reality, and draw conclusions. I have discovered that real history is rarely what I expected. Thus, I have to be inquisitive and challenge any pre-existing assumptions, which in turn grows my perspective about various events and time-periods. Learning to think this way is directly applicable to everyday business because it teaches you to always question your pre-existing assumptions on any issue.

Reading history gives one real-life leadership examples.

The best business book I have read so far this year is Ron Chernow’s Grant, which documents the life of Ulysses S. Grant. I can’t begin to recount all the leadership lessons in the book, so you will have to read it yourself. One story that continues to stand out, however, is how Grant treated Confederate General Robert E. Lee as he, and his forces, surrendered at Appomattox. Realizing the task at hand – rebuilding the nation – and never being one to “show up” his adversaries, Grant treated the soon-to-be former General with so much respect and deference that it even surprised Lee. In a modern world that continues to tempt us (me included) to be brash, this is an example of humility for us to follow. Of course, reading biographies can also teach us lessons not to follow, and Grant’s life had plenty of those as well (don’t we all?). But herein lies the power of reading historical biographies: we can learn from other’s success and failure and implement the lessons into our own life.

Reading history is humbling.

Finally, I often hear many Americans talk about how advanced our modern civilization is. Some even look down upon how “stupid” Americans were from centuries past. Reading history reminds one that the advancement of civilization is never-ending. In fact, if you read enough history, there will be a whisper that develops in your head: We aren’t as smart as we think we are, and our time will, too, end. While the latter may be a little depressing to think about, it is reality. There is no guarantee our business will be here in ten years, let alone fifty, and we know that at some point down the line our human life will end. All historical biographies end the same after all. The point is that this reality produces humility: Our business does not have all the answers, and there are no guarantees that we as a company will be around forever. This should help us be more humble, willing to seek help in our business dealing, and willing to help others with our business.

This post is longer than usual, so I won’t list any recommended books here. But, please feel free to comment and share history books that have impacted you. And if you have never read a good history book, I would recommend anything written by David McCullough to get you started, as his narrative style is often welcoming to those who prefer reading fiction.

Why Read History? Read More »

two women sitting side by side at table

Set the Tone

I firmly believe that every team member can set the tone of the organization each day. A smile, a positive attitude, a helpful mindset, all go a long way in determining the tone of the organization.But this is even more true for those of us in a leadership role. We are being watched, whether we like it or not. Every move is scrutinized. Don’t believe me? Over the last year, I have received the following feedback from various sources within our organization:

You spend too much time talking to so and so

You always appear busy

You are always serious

You are too focused on metrics

You travel too much given your young family (Sarah got to them!)

You have too much on your plate

You looked more stressed than normal

Before commenting further, I love working in an organization where people feel free to give this kind of feedback. I love it even more when it comes from team members on the manufacturing floor (a lot of the above did), because it tears down the false chasm between the white and blue collar worker. I continue to believe we are all valuable human beings, and EVERY job matters. (And just so you and I are clear, I did not create this culture. So this isn’t a personal brag. Maybe it is a little bit of a brag —and rightfully so—of the culture created by my Grandfather).I continually challenge myself to not only be open to this kind of feedback, but to react in a way that honors the giver of the feedback. In other words, I want to set a receptive tone. Now I may disagree with the feedback, and in those instances, explain why I do not agree. But this is also important because I want to a set a tone that people should speak up when things are not as the other sees them. They just need to do so in a way that honors the other person.I also spend time thinking about the feedback I receive. Admittedly, my demeanor is naturally serious, and as a dominant “D” personality on the DISC profile, I am very focused on metrics. So when I hear feedback like the above, I have to fight the natural tendency that wants to either get defensive, or feel like a failure.

Instead, I use it as a reminder to smile when I am walking through the plants, and to approach individual people that I don’t have a pre-existing relationship with —something always challenging for an introvert.All this sets a different, arguably better, tone.And because of the feedback, I grow in the process…What tone are you setting in your organization?

Set the Tone Read More »

basketball player shooting

Why the Chicago Bulls Won Six Titles

I am from Chicago and grew up in the 1980’s and 1990’s. So, I know more about Michael Jordan, and the Chicago Bulls’ glory years of the 1990’s than I’d like to admit. The championships, celebrations, and fun accompanying them, still reverberate in my mind all these years later.

What made the Chicago Bulls great? The easy answer is Michael Jordan, arguably the greatest basketball player in the history of the National Basketball Association. But this answer is too simplistic, and misses something that was much discussed during the Bulls heyday: the importance of role players.

The day was June 14, 1992. The Bulls were leading the Portland Trailblazers 3 games to 2 in their best of 7 NBA Finals Series. Playing on their home court, the Bulls were in position to win their second NBA Championship in a row. But trailing by 17 points in the fourth quarter, the game looked lost. Both Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen —an all-time great in his own right —were on the bench, and what happened next is legendary for Chicago Bulls fans: Bobby Hansen hit a three-point field goal—his only points of the entire game—that sparked a furious rally by players coming off the Bulls’ bench. These guys were not stars, but rather, role players. They knew, and accepted their roles on the team, and played them with humility and gave everything they had on the court. And before the afternoon was over, with both MJ and Scottie dominating the game down the stretch, the Chicago Bulls were NBA Champions again, winning the game 97-93.

When I mention Bobby Hansen to fellow Bulls fans, they always remember the play I refer to above. Moreso, they can name role players like Steve Kerr, Bill Wennington, and Jud Buechler from later Championship teams. These players taught us that playing a role on the team was vital to a team’s ultimate success. As the Bulls’ Head Coach Phil Jackson would remind us regularly in TV interviews, the team succeeded when Michael “let the game come to him,” and kept his “teammates involved.”  This created chemistry, and the “Zen”  Jackson desired for the team.  It all worked because Michael played his role, that of the superstar, and the role players played theirs. 

And each needed the other.

A comment I heard Adam Grant make recently on the EntreLeadership Podcast got me thinking about how the Bulls were able to mix role players with superstars. Grant says, “If you only hire ‘A’ players, then you probably have a ‘B’ team.”   Leaders tend to spend a lot of their energy, however, on hiring “A” players.  We read books, attend seminars, and create hiring strategies around hiring “A” players because we know that we need some “A” players to win (The Chicago

Bulls were pathetic both before and after Michael Jordan!). Yet, as Grant reminds us, hiring “A” all players won’t ensure success.  Rather, like the Chicago Bulls, we need to fill out our roster with role players so that every role is filled.

In practice, this might mean that a sales leader seeks a solid “account manager,” rather than seeking another “business development manager.”  This is subtle, but one role demands relational and support skills, while the other demands a lot of self-confidence and drive usually associated with an “A” player.  Organizations need both to thrive, so it is up to the leader to decipher which skill set they need in a given context.

The challenge with this post is simple: ask yourself what kind of role are you missing on your team right now?  Driving to specificity here makes all the difference.

You might discover that you are not missing a superstar, but rather a “Bobby Hansen.”

And fulfilling this role might similarly make all the difference to your team’s ultimate success!

Why the Chicago Bulls Won Six Titles Read More »

long escalator with man walking off bottom

Are you a de-escalator?

Imagine someone on your team sends a mass email to you and the rest of the team that seems to challenge you or your ideas.  What’s your response?

Or, imagine that your four year old has disobeyed you for the 34th time since lunch. They’re pushing all the right buttons, and you feel like you are going to explode. What’s your response?

Or finally, imagine that your significant other makes comment about a job you said you were going to do around the house, but you just have not gotten around to it yet. Their comment is said with kind words, but it feels passive aggressive, like they’re not saying what is really on their mind. What’s your response?

I have been thinking a lot lately about conflict, and how it often escalates because of the way people respond. Before commenting further, however, let me clarify that conflict is not a naughty word. In work, parenting, and marriage, conflict is inevitable. We should, therefore, embrace it by having real one-on-one conversations with those we have conflict with. Having said that, and the point of today’s post, is there are things we can do to de-escalate conflict.

Imagine…

Instead of “replying all” to the threatening email, you have a one-on-one discussion about the issue with the person that sent it. In doing so, you give voice to their perspective, and even appreciate some of the good points they made. But, you also share your perspective, and do so in a way that is strong, kind, and not defensive.

If done correctly, the two of you have de-escalated the situation. The benefit for your co-workers copied is that they don’t have to receive the email barrage of the two of you going back and forth, nor do they have to spend any more mental energy worrying about the conflict.

The same can be said about the four year old and the spouse. Not that I would know on either front (I wish!), but since I have a four year old, I have to realize that every time I give in to my anger, and thus escalate the situation, I am in reality putting more stress on the entire household. And with my wife, we created a routine early in our marriage to force us to resolve the daily conflicts that arise before they escalate out of control. We talk and pray together each night (and it is really hard to pray with someone that you have unresolved conflict with!). So if the situation above arose, we know we don’t have to react immediately in anger—we have dedicated space and time to talk about it in the flow of our daily lives as a married couple.

The next time a scenario pops up, at work or at home, the question I challenge you to ask yourself is this:

Are you a de-escalator?

If so, act accordingly.

And, on another note, as a leader, identify the de-escalators within your organization.  I like promoting these people because it makes my life–and the life of the organization—better!

Are you a de-escalator? Read More »

men taking in yellow chair

The Break Room Doesn’t Lie

I was speaking recently with one of our plant managers when they shared a tremendous insight:

“The break room does not lie.”

What they meant by this statement is that in order to understand what is really happening in their plant, they needed to go to the break room and listen to their team.

To be clear, this isn’t detective work.

Rather, it is “leader” work.

As the leader, it is our job to be inquisitive. It is our job to ask how our team is doing? Maybe one of them has a health issue, or a family issue. Real life is shared when the curtain is down, when the play is stopped, and everyone has a chance to breath.

This is why the break room does not lie.

What about the new company initiative? Is it failing because people are lazy? Or is it failing because of unforeseen complications that management never imagined?

The break room does not lie.

What this conversation reminded me was how important it is for me to walk through our building, have genuine conversations, and get to know PEOPLE. For in order to understand issues, you first have to get to know people.

And coming full circle, this is why this insight is tremendous. For spending time in the break room, establishing relationships with people in their element, is the job of the plant manager.

It actually is the job of EVERY leader.

The Break Room Doesn’t Lie Read More »

one dollar bill

“Your bid is not competitive?”

If you’re in the business world, you’ve been turned down by a customer claiming that your bid just isn’t “competitive.”  What exactly does that mean?

Does it mean:

They can buy it cheaper elsewhere?

Everyone else is cheaper?

That our competitor has better quality than us?

That they deliver faster than us?

That they’re more innovative?

Or, is the criteria something internal to them?

Are they measured by how much money they can save their organization up front, thus they need to find the “best” deal?

Are they measured by total cost – upfront AND cost of quality — and the solution they are choosing is the most valuable?

Or, do they just want a discount because negotiation is a game, and if they don’t get a discount, it most likely means they are losers in the deal?

“You are not competitive” is often a cop-out for one of the above, or something else altogether. It can potentially mean many things, and it is simply not helpful.

What’s helpful are genuine conversations. Information that leads to a better understanding of what the customer is looking for, and how we can get better.

(And we can always get better.)

And one more thing…

I would never use Kohl’s as a “market comparison” to Nordstrom prices, nor would I be allowed to comp home values from an apartment on Lake Shore Drive in hopes of increasing the value of my suburban home.

Why, then, is this acceptable in the B2B world?

So let’s all try to avoid this phrase.  It doesn’t do any of us any good.  Instead, let’s be honest about what we really want.

“Your bid is not competitive?” Read More »